When King of Tokyo got Actually, it's Power Up Expansion, I decided to get King of Tokyo as well.

I got King of New York two years before and it fell flat with every group I played, and I myself was not statisfied with it. But from the Reviews, I actually thought King of Tokyo would fix all the Problems King of New York has. While King of New York was considered an upgrade from the designer himself and a lot of people, it feels like the predecessor.

Player eliminationNow, King of Tokyo and King of New York both still have Player Elimination. It is a risky move from a game Designer for a game that goes longer than 20 Minutes. Sometimes, in King of Tokyo, there is that awkward moment where the person whose monster got eliminated first waits for just that bit to long and the other players try to rush the game. Thankfully, that doesn't happen very often and is fine (since the Player Elimination does put some extra excitement into the game). Unfortunately, the extra 5-10 Minutes King of New York takes almost guarantee that you come into that unconfortable area.

Explaining the gameIt takes 5 minutes to explain King of Tokyo and the Person learning it will have the rules down. Explaining King of New York actually doesn't take a lot longer (let's say: 10 minutes), but there are so many special cases with the added die faces that it takes some playing to wrap you head around it and make strategic decisions. The worst offenders are the two cards, Superstar and Statue of Liberty. Explaining those is a pain, especially the later one.

InteractionFor some reason, King of New York doesn't feel like the brawler it is supposed to be. It's not monsters vs. monsters any more. In theory, changing the bland numbers on the King of Tokyo Dice for added theme should do the opposite, but in reality, it is exactly the part of the theme that distracts from the interactive nature. King of Tokyo feels like a big brawl, King of New York doesn't really feel like that. Too many distracting mechanics with victory points as the main way to win. Victory points in my view were always just a timing mechanism to bring the game to an end.

Place in the collectionNow, my game group mostly loves King of Tokyo but goes a bit "meh" in King of New York. Reason is not that King of New York is to complex for them: My regular gaming groups favourite games are Terra Mystica and Imperial Assault, both of which are not exactly simple. King of Tokyo somehow sustains interest where a lot of other simple games didn't. It's the appetizer to the big menu, or the dessert after torturing your brain cells with that big strategic game. King of New York not so much.

If I play games with non-geek-gamer friends (I say non-geek-gamer because those are gamers, too, but for those, Games like Terra Mystica feel like doing your taxes), King of New York also falls flat. It takes a bit too long to explain, it is a push your luck game that tries to be something more. Unfortunately, if I explain Terra Mystica to a non-geek-gamer friend, they are constantly thinking "oh my god", but when they play, they think "hey that's not so complicated". That is because there is an engine behind that game, and even if some details in the rules got lost on you, you do remember they where there and that you might need it just now. King of New York doesn't have this. You have to remember, and you might lose because you play your first time, somehow forgot that the military will actually shot everything if someone throws three skulls, and that there was actually a 50% chance you won't make it to the next turn because there is just a single Jeep in your burrow.

If you have King of Tokyo, should you buy King of New York?While I would still say King of New York + King of New York Power Up is a great expansion for King of Tokyo. Because you get more monsters. But only in that combination because you get all those sweet evolution powers for KOTY. If you love King of Tokyo, you can't go wrong with King of New York and King of New York Power Up, even if you - like me - think King of Tokyo is the better game. With the new version of King of Tokyo, it is actually the only way to play with Evolution Cards.

If you have King of New York, should you buy King of Tokyo?Of course. It is the streamlined, modern version that got rid of a lot of unnecessary extra rules to have that juicy, fast paced experience without sacrificing much depth.

But I think King of New York is the better game!Feel free to explain! Actually, I bought King of New York instead of King of Tokyo because I read "King of New York is the better game" in a lot of discussions and even podcasts. And I wrote this review because I wanted to give people who are on the fence between the one or the other another view. In the end, I am fine that I bought King of New York because of those general consensus on boardgamegeek, since King of Tokyo got a new Edition, but I'd say to anyone who is undecided to get King of Tokyo first. I am a big fan of Richard Garfield (after all, King of Tokyo is one of my favourite games and Android Netrunner is another one of my favourite games), but I think with King of New York, he overengineered an already great game.

Exactly same as my thought about them.I bought King of New York first because many people said that it is a better version of King of Tokyo, but I ended up buying King of Tokyo and I vastly prefer Tokyo to New York.I'll still keep King of New York only because of the monsters and the power up expansion.

This question was discussed at great lenght in my gaming group.In my opinion, both are hardly comparable: - King of New York feels deeper with more to think of and more thematic flavour - sometimes you destroy buildings and fleethe district, sometimes you try to roll as many skulls as possible to hurt every monster, sometimes you might want to collect as many stars as possible (especially when being famous). - King of Tokyo is a little more accessable for "non-ggek-gamers": try to collect paws for damage, numbers for points or lightnings for upgrades; in case of emergency try to get hearts - that's basically it. Straight forward , easy fun for a broad range of players without to many distractions.

While I don't agree that they are not comparable (King of New York basically is like a stand alone Expansion, the rules core is the same), I'd agree that King of New York has more thematic flavour. But my gaming group are quite the geek gamers (as I said, Terra Mystica and Imperial Assault are all-time favourites), and that is exactly the problem with King of New York for us: it's complexity level isn't rewarded, and there are so many other options if we want a meatier game.

That beeing said, since King of Tokyo is played basically every time, we do play King of New York quite often to "give it another chance". I guess we will continue to do so, but with the decision from IELLO to not include New York Evolution Cards for the upcoming King of Tokyo: Power Up, I'll see it vanish from our gaming table for good. Which doesn't matter, because it will live on. The King of New York Monsters are just awesome, with hilarious names for the powers, my favourites beeing "New Theme Song", the whole Communist Theme of the Red-stared ape with redistribution powers, and "The short arm of the law" for that T-Rex Sheriff.

But God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

In your world, I have another name. You must learn to know me by it. That was the very reason why you were brought to Narnia, that by knowing me here for a little, you may know me better there.

I have owned KoT for 3 years and thoroughly enjoy it. While I haven't played KoNY, I have had no desire to. Another game I own that looks to have gotten the "gamer's upgrade" is Piece o' Cake. Funny thing is that the new game is called New York Slice. Something about New York I guess

This topic has been discussed a lot already. That "KoNY sucks" seems popular on BGG forums, and it seems like a lack of Open-mindedness to me.KoT and KoNY are both great games, and you can't blame Iello to expand the franchise to another population. What population, will you ask? People who like light games, but find KoT a bit too light. People like me. And my friends, who admit they would not play KoT again, now that KoNY is there. People for who the increase in complexity is basically nothing to manage, but that appreciate the addition in the gameplay department.What's wrong with KoT? Very little things, in facts. But come on, all those pairs of '1' and '2' are boring. Ending with a mix bag of numbers is not very exciting. It's ok, I guess, it's randomness, but KoNY doesn't have that.What's better in KoNY? Thematic, of course. You can go rampage against buildings and military units! Why wouldn't you love that? Don't you get that in every single monster movies ever made? And what about the super star card? Who wouldn't want to be a super star?Some other things fall a bit more flat. That statue of liberty is weirdly thematized. Skulls doesn't scale like the other die faces. Ok, the game is not perfect.My point is that KoNY is a good variation, neither for the casual gamers nor the hardcore gamers. But for something in the middle.

What's better in KoNY? Thematic, of course. You can go rampage against buildings and military units! Why wouldn't you love that? Don't you get that in every single monster movies ever made? And what about the super star card? Who wouldn't want to be a super star?Some other things fall a bit more flat. That statue of liberty is weirdly thematized. Skulls doesn't scale like the other die faces. Ok, the game is not perfect.My point is that KoNY is a good variation, neither for the casual gamers nor the hardcore gamers. But for something in the middle.

I don't have anything against any publisher who supports a successful product, tries something new with the author and puts illustrators on the payroll that just make beautiful work. But I will make the point that while on paper King of New York is more thematic because it replaces the "boring" numbers with destroying buildings, fighting against the military and fame, for me, the real play experience is actually less thematic. Suddenly, a game about Monsters fighting against each other loses exactly that focus. That already starts when explaining the game: "King of New York is a game of Monsters fighting each other. This is the claw symbol to do that, and here is the hearth symbol to heal wounds, and here for gaining the games currency. Now to the other three symbols that have different mechanisms...". In the explanation of the game, the new Mechanics of King of New York that are not about Monsters fighting each other takes 2/3 or even longer to explain the game. If I go to the movies and want to see a Monster fighting the Military, I go watch Godzilla. If I want to see Monsters fighting each other, I watch King Kong vs Godzilla, and I expect the military to be helpless, puny humans watching how the powers of nature destroy their civilisation, not shooting one of the monsters down because it destroyed to many buildings!

I think it actually detracts from the core theme. But then again, that's my personal preference: I think a great design starts if there is nothing you could take away from it, and then carefully think about if you really need anything extra.

As I said, I actually bought it because that seemed to be the consensus here on BGG and I wanted to make a counterpoint for everyone who stands before the same decision, because I actually lost two years of the awesomeness that is King of Tokyo to give people another perspective. I think there was a bit of what I think is the "cult of the new" with King of New York, and I am very happy that IELLO lured me into King of Tokyo with those extra King of Tokyo powers in Power Up! and almost at the same time putting in a new edition of King of Tokyo, which brought countless hours of fun to me and my gaming group.

I also put this review in because IELLO right now bringt out single monster packs, and I worry they think there are only customers that want "something extra". I am perfectly fine with more of the same and don't want to explain extra rules to someone because he thought C'thullu would be fun.

So your point here is that KoT is 'monsters vs monsters', while KoNY is about 'monsters vs the world (including other monsters)'. This is a fair point. Movies cover both storylines, and I don't think one is better than the other. I wouldn't consider that to value one game over the other.But if we agree that KoT is "monsters vs monsters", what about the die faces with numbers? This is so abstract. And worse, in my experience, you don't want them, and you reroll them all the time. Except, maybe, if you get a couple of '2' or '3' at your first roll, or if the game is reaching its end and you need the points to win. Getting points is nice, I just think that doing so while doing something is more fun.

To me too, New York feels a lot like complexity purely for complexity's sake and it does indeed detract from player interaction. I am not a players vs scenario type of gamer so I can accept that perhaps I am not the game's intended audience but I find that fighting against the world in New York feels too much like fighting against the rules of the game to try and get the real monster battles you were promised.

I've played both games but own just KONY. Even though I like KOT, I have felt boring and very anti thematic the number die-faces on KOT.

My least favorite part of KONY was the skull results, but I house-ruled them to:1 skull: no change2 skulls: units attack all monsters present in your district and on Manhattan. 3 skulls: without change (or maybe ignoring the Statue of Liberty card).